Paul M Kemp1, Katie Clyde, Clive Holmes. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Southampton University Hospitals Trust, UK. Paul.Kemp@suht.swest.nhs.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of imaging the presynaptic dopaminergic terminal using DaTSCAN single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) on the clinical diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with possible dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), who were referred for imaging. METHODS: A retrospective case note study was undertaken, involving a series of consecutive patients who had undergone DaTSCAN SPECT 12-24 months earlier. RESULTS: Case notes of 80 patients were reviewed. DaTSCAN imaging results were abnormal (indicating DLB) in 20 (25%) and normal (suggesting an alternative diagnosis or absence of disease) in 60 (75%) patients. Of the 20 patients with an abnormal scan, 18 had a postscan working clinical diagnosis of DLB (90%), one had diagnosis of vascular dementia (5%) and another had no recorded outcome (5%). Fifty-eight out of the 60 patients with a normal DaTSCAN image result had an alternative clinical diagnosis of DLB (95%). Consequently, DaTSCAN findings were concordant with the outcome clinical diagnosis in 76 out of the 80 (95%) cases. Subsequent to DaTSCAN SPECT, scan findings and diagnoses were discussed with patients and/or their carers in 94% of cases and subsequent treatment options discussed in 93% of cases. CONCLUSION: It would seem that DaTSCAN imaging has a marked influence on the working clinical diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with suspected DLB.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of imaging the presynaptic dopaminergic terminal using DaTSCAN single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) on the clinical diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with possible dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), who were referred for imaging. METHODS: A retrospective case note study was undertaken, involving a series of consecutive patients who had undergone DaTSCAN SPECT 12-24 months earlier. RESULTS: Case notes of 80 patients were reviewed. DaTSCAN imaging results were abnormal (indicating DLB) in 20 (25%) and normal (suggesting an alternative diagnosis or absence of disease) in 60 (75%) patients. Of the 20 patients with an abnormal scan, 18 had a postscan working clinical diagnosis of DLB (90%), one had diagnosis of vascular dementia (5%) and another had no recorded outcome (5%). Fifty-eight out of the 60 patients with a normal DaTSCAN image result had an alternative clinical diagnosis of DLB (95%). Consequently, DaTSCAN findings were concordant with the outcome clinical diagnosis in 76 out of the 80 (95%) cases. Subsequent to DaTSCAN SPECT, scan findings and diagnoses were discussed with patients and/or their carers in 94% of cases and subsequent treatment options discussed in 93% of cases. CONCLUSION: It would seem that DaTSCAN imaging has a marked influence on the working clinical diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with suspected DLB.